Single stud on toe of boot?

[OB..]

One way or another, wearing that boot was wrong. That single stud is regarded as particularly dangerous. If Tialata had injured somebody wearing an illegal boot he - and possibly others - could have =ended in serious trouble.

says who? the editor of the web site?

Yes. He is a retired senior referee. (He may well have discussed this with current international referees - he gets them to do the Q&A).

 

[ddjamo]

that sinister single stud...in fact...it's become a problem here in my county...the single studs are a big issue. me being a married stud - don't cause as many problems...well...not quite as many.

 

[OB..]

Disagree, If it is a single stud and the front where there used to be two, YOU have constructed it in this way.

I don't believe for one moment that is the intention of the heading "Construction and Design" Appendix 2 IRB Regulation 12.

 

[Robert Burns]

I agree. But the consequence of doing so is the same as if they boot were constructed that way. I.e All pressure through a single stud.

 

[OB..]

I agree. But the consequence of doing so is the same as if they boot were constructed that way. I.e All pressure through a single stud.

Not quite. With the stud being set further back, the sole of the boot is more likely to be part of the contact.

This is not really an either/or situation. All studs can injure, which is why it is illegal to use your boots on a player. A single stud at the heel could also cause injury etc.

 

[TheBFG]

http://www.sareferees.co.za/news/ref_news/2723301.htm

not sure if we ever got to the end of this thread :chin: , but when looking at the SAFFERS website saw this.

 

[Phil E]

http://www.sareferees.co.za/news/ref_news/2723301.htm

not sure if we ever got to the end of this thread :chin: , but when looking at the SAFFERS website saw this.

See post #78

You are only a month behind the times country boy :bday:

 

[Simon Thomas]

Phil - he's been out getting the silage in :biggrin:

 

[TheBFG]

no chuffin grass around here!

and no......

training for the 7's season

 

[PeterH]

Email sent on behalf of Richard Glynne-Jones to all Referee Society Secretaries

Ladies and Gentlemen,

Illegal Boots

Please see attached photographs of a boot with a single toe stud configuration that is being purchased for use in playing Rugby. This is illegal under Law 4.4 (j) and players should not be permitted to play with boots with that sole configuration Please note that any Adidas boots with this configuration have not been designed or sold as a Rugby product.

Please ask your referees to be aware of this development.

Regards

Richard

 

[dave_clark]

i'll pre-empt crossref and say that i will wait to hear it through the established channels afforded to us mere CRefCs :biggrin:

 

[Phil E]

What are you waiting to hear?
That this boot actually exists?

I can assure you that it does. First seen in Warwickshire by a colleague of mine who showed me these pictures at our Society dinner last week.

 

[crossref]

i'll pre-empt crossref and say that i will wait to hear it through the established channels afforded to us mere CRefCs :biggrin:

he he!

Did you get a email from RFU on leggings? (I did!) haven't got this one though. I wonder if it will be sent to CRefCs

 

[Dixie]

The owner of these boots seems to have actually polished them - perhaps in an effort to impress the ref! Amazed he didn't insert ironed white laces. I wonder why the RFU didn't mention the sub-brand name of the boots - i.e. adidas oojits? This does highlight an additional difficulty with the already problematic Regulation 12: if a player wanders into a sports shop and buys a pair of studded boots, they may or may not be marketed as "rugby" boots. In this case, the RFU seems to have chercked with the manufacturer, and found that they did not expect them to be used for rugby and had not designed them as such.

I guess we've all seen boots that are probably soccer boots being worn by players at the stud check, but have just checked for safety rather than legality in accordance with directions from above (have the CrefC's seen these)?

Apart from the illegal stud at the toe, what do we think of the two hard-looking plastic nipples between and above the first "pair" of studs, and between and below the second pair? Would any of us have concerns about these, or are they wholly comparable to the entire stud system on a pair of "bladed" boots?

 

[Adam]

From having a quick research of these boots it appears that they are an old pair, the design of Adidas boots has progressed significantly. I cannot find them to buy online at all.

 

[Phil E]

The boots were brand new and this was the first time the player had worn them.

 

[Dixie]

The boots were brand new and this was the first time the player had worn them.

Possible of course - but look at the photo of the top of the boot. The white embellishment to the front right of the boot appears to have boot polish on it; and the stiching all around that section appears old and dirty. Further, though in good condition the studs don't look new - is it poossible the player's been wearing these for some time, has been told time and again by tjhe ref to change them (while being allowed to wear them "on this occasion"), but finally came up against a ref who meant what he said and showed every sign of reporting the matter?